T.F. Green Airport Improvement Program - FEIS Chapters - PVD

T.F. Green Airport Improvement ProgramEnvironmental Impact Statement and Final Section 4(f) Evaluationresidential areas. Standard lighting of the building and employee lot would be used to enhance security of thearea. The Integrated Cargo Facility light emissions are not expected to cause significant annoyance or interferewith normal activities.Runway Lighting and Navigational AidsRunway 16-34 would shift approximately 100 feet to the north; however, the approach lighting system wouldremain in its current location at the Runway 34 End. The approach lighting at the Runway 34 End would belocated 360 feet from the nearest residences, which is the same distance as under the No-Action Alternative(Table 5-129). Appropriate taxiway edge and centerline lights as well as any required lighted signage would belocated along the taxiway and apron. The Runway 16 End currently does not have approach lighting, but a shiftof the runway 100 feet north would be needed for the runway centerline, Precision Approach Path Indicator(PAPI) lights, and edge lights.The light emissions impacts associated with Runway 5-23 under Alternative B4 include shifting the approachlighting at the Runway 5 End approximately 1,500 feet south. The Runway 5 End approach lighting would berelocated on land currently owned by RIAC. The RPZ would provide a 400-foot buffer between the outermostapproach light to the nearest residences in the Greenwood neighborhood (320 feet closer than the No-ActionAlternative). RIAC would also acquire an easement of at least 200 feet on either side of the approach lightingcenterline as well as a 200-foot buffer from the end of approach lights. The Runway 23 End would not shiftunder Alternative B4, so there would be no change in approach lighting when compared to the No-ActionAlternative (Table 5-129).Off-Airport RoadwaysRoadway lighting for the Partially Relocated Airport Road and Realigned Main Avenue will be designed for thePreferred Alternative. These roads will be designed following Rhode Island Department of Transportation andCity of Warwick lighting requirements, as appropriate, and their lighting would be typical of communityconditions.Visual ImpactsUnder Alternative B4, the visual setting of the eligible airport historic district would be changed. Hangar No. 1,a contributing element to the District, would be demolished to enhance safety. Any changes in the visualcontext or setting of these historical properties would result in an Adverse Effect under Section 106 of theNational Historic Preservation Act, 461 and in a use under Section 4(f) of the U.S. Department of Transportation Act. 462These visual effects would be addressed and mitigated as part of the Section 106 and Section 4(f) processes (seeChapter 6, Mitigation).Under Alternative B4, there would be moderate visual changes at the extended Runway 5 End and along thenew alignment of Main Avenue. A number of residences along Main Avenue and at the Runway 5 End wouldbe acquired for construction, or would be eligible for acquisition (either as a result of noise mitigation orbecause of their location in the RPZ). Residences that remained in that area would have unobstructed views ofthe Airport. There would be some visual change at the Runway 16 End, resulting from Partially Relocated461 Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, 36 CFR 800.16(l).462 U.S. Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Section 4(f), 49 USC, section 303(c).Chapter 5 - Environmental Consequences 5-274 July 2011\\mawatr\ev\09228.00\reports\FEIS_Final_July_2011\PVD_CH05_Environmental_Cons_JUL_2011.doc